raczoliver

I heard he mostly chose to play right-handed guitars because the bridge pickup of the Stratocaster (his guitar model of choice) is tilted so that it is closer to the neck under the thicker strings when the strings are attached in their intended positions. The left-handed version of the Stratocaster has the tilt reversed, since the strings are meant to be "upside down" for left-handed playing, but he preferred the tone when the strings were reversed on the right-handed guitar. I highly doubt most people could tell the difference, but most people are not Jimi Hendrix. One infamous photo blogger who shall not be named claims to have had a left-handed custom Nikon F100. There's even a picture of him using it on his home page. He was probably just bored and made it all up for the heck of it. In airplanes, the thrust levers are between the two seats, so the pilot on the left has to operate the flight controls with their left hand, while the one on the right has to use the right hand when they are flying. It takes a few hours of getting used to when switching seats for the first time, after that both feel equally comfortable.

I was attacked by a ransomware a few months ago, and it actually started encrypting system files as well, so Windows slowly started crashing and I noticed something was wrong way before it went through all my data. Anyway, I have two backups of everything important locally in my house in different rooms (none of which were connected), and one at my parents' place halfway around the globe that I update once a year. So thanks to the attackers, I finally got around to tidying up my computer with a clean Windows installation.

For what you want to achieve, I think robocopy is the best tool, and it's built into Windows. "robocopy source destination /mir" in the power shell or command prompt should do the trick. This will make the destination identical to the source (including deletion of files from the destination if necessary). Robocopy is a pretty powerful tool, the "robocopy /?" command will give you a list of all its functions. However, you have to be careful with it, it will execute whatever you tell it to without asking you to confirm. Garbage in, garbage out.

I hear you, and I understand that there may be specific DX lenses that perform reasonably well on the FX frame, so I'm not at all saying that changing to an FX camera means you have to bin all your DX lenses. Attaching a DX lens occasionally to take a few pictures if you do not have a corresponding FX lens is totally fine, however, I would advise against building a system that has only DX lenses with an FX camera. That is a sure way to miss out on the capabilities and benefits of the FX system.

If not obvious by now, I would add to the above that I would consider using DX lenses on an FX camera as a temporary solution only, until you save up enough to buy some dedicated FX lenses to go with your camera, otherwise the drawbacks almost outweigh the benefits.

I must admit I did not read this thread in its entirety, so I did not catch that suggestion of yours, but it is fairly close to what I was proposing. In lack of a dedicated ISO dial, I suppose it would be the most reasonable solution. And no, I would definitely not like having to turn the dials all the way to the end to enable auto mode. Just a press of a button and one flick of the dial, just like with auto ISO now.

I think we shouldn't have exposure modes at all. Instead, like the ISO, aperture and shutter speed should also have an "auto" setting. Enabling the "auto" mode on any combination of them would give the equivalent of different exposure modes: none: M shutter: A aperture: S ISO: M with auto ISO shutter + aperture: P shutter + ISO: A with auto ISO aperture + ISO: S with auto ISO shutter + aperture + ISO: P with auto ISO Ideally there would be a third dial of some sort, so all three parameters could be set with their own respective dial. The auto mode could be engaged by pressing a button while turning the corresponding dial.

I used to own both the 135 and 105 DC lenses, but sold the 135 a while ago. I still use the 105 for both studio and outdoor portraits, but to be frank, the DC ring barely ever leaves the center position, and when it does, it's only to experiment a little, and then I generally come to the conclusion that it should just stay in the middle. Both are really nice lenses for portraits, but I found it harder to get accurate focus with the 135, which also had stronger chromatic aberration, and I decided it was not necessary to keep both. Up until a few years ago these lenses were considered quite expensive, and specifically aimed at professional photographers. Now the 105 F/1.4 makes the DC lenses appear like they're the budget option.

I suppose it's half full vs. half empty. For me personally, it feels more straightforward to push a button when I want to focus and not push it when I don't. The biggest downside of using the BBF is when I want to hand over the camera to someone else to take a picture with me in it once or twice a year. I usually end up giving them my cell phone instead. I have also noticed that the focus and recompose method sometimes gives better results than using a focus point close to the edge of the frame, but I get much better results using the peripheral focus points with the D850 than I did with the D700.

I'm not David, but I'll tell you why I think it's good to use back button focus and disable focus activation from the shutter release button: 1: You never have to switch between AF-S and AF-C, because you get both by leaving the camera on AF-C at all times. If you want to lock focus, you simply release the AF-ON button, and you can recompose at your will, without switching to AF-S. 2: If you are using a lens that allows instant manual focus override, you never have to switch between autofocus and manual focus either. You can release the shutter without activating AF. This is useful if you don't want to change focus between two shots. If AF is not removed from the shutter release button, the only way you could deactivate autofocus would be by switching the camera and/or lens to manual focus. I've had situations where it was perhaps difficult to acquire focus, and once I did, I did not want to change it for the next several shots. I personally tried the back button AF once, and never went back to the default setup.

I go to Paris several times every year for work, and often take a stroll around the famous landmarks, including the Notre Dame. A few years ago I found out by chance that an old friend I hadn't seen for ages also happened to be visiting Paris (for the first time) whiIe I was there, so we decided to reconnect and do some sightseeing together. That's the only time I went inside the Notre Dame, and I must say it was very impressive. I took these with a D700 and I think the 24-120 f/4.

I have had a number of travel tripods, and now I'm looking for one whose size (must reach eye level without a center column) and stability will enjoy priority over portability. However, since photography for me always involves some sort of traveling, collapsed size and weight can't be ignored, otherwise the tripod would just be left at home every time and I'd take something smaller and less stable with me instead. I have a Nikon D850, and the heaviest lens I would use is a 70-200 f/2.8, so let's call it 2.5-3 kg maximum. I would use this tripod for landscapes/nature and cityscapes. I would pair the tripod with a ball head with at least a 40mm ball, such as the Sirui K30X or Leofoto LH-40. Unfortunately the RRS ball heads cost more than I'm willing to spend now. I have basically narrowed my choices down to these four candidates in no particular order: Feisol CT-3742 FEISOL Very light for its beefy legs, but while short enough when collapsed, the wide mounting plate still makes it less portable and would take up quite some space in a suitcase. I also heard about some quality control issues, namely feet falling off and leg angle adjustment flaps getting stuck. I am located in China, and the Feisol is not available here at all, but I do go to the U.S. fairly often, and could easily order it next month so that it waits for me at the hotel when I arrive. The problem is if I have any warranty issues, it is more problematic for me to deal with them from here than with the Chinese manufacturers. Sirui SR-3204 SIRUI SR Series Tripods - Guangdong SIRUI Optical Co., Ltd. I heard only positive things about this tripod, and deep down this is what I want, and I'm trying to justify the extra weight and size. It is the largest and heaviest of the four, and I'm afraid it would often stay at home, in which case there's not much point in having it. Sirui R-2214X SIRUI R-X Series Tripods - Guangdong SIRUI Optical Co., Ltd. The lightest and most affordable of the four, but also with the thinnest legs (18.6mm-29.4mm), so possibly the least stable. However, if it is stiff enough for my gear, why not? It also comes with detachable center column, which could come in handy for studio portraits. Leofoto LS-365C LS-365C - Leofoto Tallest of the four when extended, shortest and most compact when collapsed, due to the fact that it has five-section legs, but very beefy ones. My main concern is that stability would suffer due to the 5 section legs. I have not found a single review of this tripod online, but other Leofoto tripods of the same series received favorable reviews, such as the LS-324C, which is its smaller, four section counterpart (but too short for my purpose). It even has the exact same size when collapsed. The diameter of its four legs are the same as the bottom four of the LS-365C (22, 25, 28, 32mm), but the LS-365 adds a 36mm thick section on top of those. Theoretically, if we assume that they are made of the exact same materials with the same amount of precision (both very likely), would an extra, thicker section reduce stiffness and stability much? The manufacturer rates its maximum loading higher than that of the smaller tripod, if that means anything. I guess my main question would be centered around how much stability suffers with an extra leg section, and how it would compare to a very similar tripod with four sections whose thickness is the same as the thinner four of the five-section tripod. The portable design and light weight make the Leofoto LS-365 a very attractive candidate, but not if stability is compromised. Then again, my gear is not particularly heavy. Any thoughts, lectures, and recommendations are highly appreciated.

I think by volume, the majority of this lens is air, that's why it's so light. The barrel is indeed made of plastic, but I would not necessarily associate plastic with bad build quality nowadays. Airplanes are made of "plastic". I've never had a plastic suitcase break, while aluminum gets dented and scratched all the time. As for why it's so costly, probably partly because of the aspherical lens elements, super integrated coating, nano crystal coating and other wizardry, and partly because Nikon thinks they will still sell at this price, so why not?

Generally it is recommended to turn off VR at shutter speeds faster than 1/500s

I'm actually having much more luck with manual focus on the D850 than I did on the D700. I may even pick up a copy of the 50mm f/1.2 lens one of these days. For 85mm, I I'll stick with AF. If I blew up some of my old pictures taken on 35mm film to the size of a 1:1 image from the D850, I suspect I'd find that I wasn't focusing all that accurately back then either. I just never viewed those pictures much larger than an 11x14" print.

That's fine, I'm still reading. I found it quite amusing when I saw this thread reemerge today. :-)

I sometimes feel similarly, but considering the amount of features and functions a modern camera has, I'm not sure anyone uses more than a fraction of them. I definitely don't. Even a relatively simple camera would most likely have one or two functions that I don't use, but at the same time I may be missing some if the camera is too simple. It would be a very unlikely coincidence if anyone found a camera that had everything they needed and nothing more. Unless it's a custom made camera.

Do they have the same optical formula? Never seen them myself. Having bought a D850 less than a year ago, I am not planning to be an early user of the Z system, but thought the news could be interesting to those who are.

Looks like there will soon be several 3rd party prime lenses available for the Nikon Z system from Kipon. They appear to be manual focus only, seem like very affordable options, but of course image quality is yet to be seen. KIPON releases ELEGANT series lenses, world-first full-frame lenses for new Nikon Z &Canon R mount cameras from third-party-KIPON adapter

The reflective surface of a car may produce a high contrast scene where correct exposure is important, but it shouldn't be too hard to obtain good results with a modern digital sensor and Lightroom's capabilities. If you don't want to do shadow recovery in Lightroom, you'll have to expose more, but then you run the risk of blowing out the highlights, which is generally harder to correct. Are you shooting raw or jpg? If you are shooting jpg, try a different profile, like "flat", "neutral", or whatever low contrast profile your camera has. If you shoot raw, you can also select a lower contrast camera profile to start with in Lightroom. I wouldn't sweat lifting the shadows slightly in Lightroom if necessary, most of the times I am able to get quite good results.

I had the same problem where the AF point would inexplicably change. It would always happen when I lift the camera to take a picture after a period of inactivity. I found the culprit to be custom setting a7: "store by orientation". It's a function that stores your selected AF point separately for horizontal and vertical composition, so that for example if you are taking portraits, the selected AF point will be close to the subject's eye as soon as you flip the camera over from one orientation to the other. However, when the meter and the LCD turn off after a few seconds (whatever you have it set to), the next time you hold the camera to your eyes, the previously selected AF point will be highlighted, regardless of whether you are holding the camera horizontally or vertically. But as soon as you wake the camera up, the focus point will switch to the one you had previously selected in that orientation. So if I had been shooting vertically for a few frames, then stopped shooting, the next time I hold the camera to my eye horizontally, the previously selected AF point will still be highlighted, until I push a button, when it suddenly jumps to the one I last selected in the horizontal orientation. It took a while to realize what the "problem" was.

I don't have any lenses with a tripod collar (my biggest lens is the 70-200 f/4G, and I did not buy the collar, although I am thinking of it), but it seems like a horrible place to hold a lens by. I always think of a video I saw but can't seem to find now, in which a photographer is holding what appears to be either a single digit Nikon or a Canon 1D series camera with a large telephoto lens attached by the side of a swimming pool. He is somehow trying to balance the whole combo in his left hand by the tripod collar, and of course it falls into the swimming pool, otherwise the video would not be online. He jumps after the camera in a futile attempt to save it. About the D850, last Christmas I was "just looking around" in a camera store in Tokyo, and ended up walking out with a D850, but a few weeks ago I was in New York, and B&H still didn't have one in stock.

I get significantly fewer shots with the D850 than the specs are saying I should. Around 400-500 on a single charge. Is there a known issue?

$1000 can get you a huge upgrade from the D70 nowadays. Disclaimer: I have only briefly used a friend's D7200, and read the specs, but that does seem like a very good bang for the buck. If you are interested in FX and your lenses are compatible, a used D700 is also good in my opinion. The D700 may be an outdated camera, but it has a better (in my opinion) user interface, much bigger viewfinder, and just in general I find it more pleasurable to use than most DX bodies. My first digital body was a D80 in 2006, then I moved to the D700 in 2012, and recently to the D850. The step from the D80 to the D700 was huge in terms of image quality. In fact, I think it was bigger than the step from the 12 mp D700 to the 46 mp D850. If sensor size or the prosumer layout is not a priority, the more modern D7200 is probably the better choice, though. As for getting a new camera right before vacation, I'm not sure what kind of pictures you take during your vacation, but most likely if you know how to use single servo auto focus and set the exposure, you're good. This assumes you shoot raw and don't have to fiddle with white balance and picture control settings in camera.

My problem with it is when I don't want to fully extend the legs, only a certain number of sections, I would want to start with the thickest and work my way progressively to the thinner ones. However, when I twist the leg one or two clicks, it is not necessarily the thickest sections that are unlocked, so I have to extend all the legs fully first, and then retract the sections that I don't need, starting from the thinnest.